Wow, very interesting situation. So Jonny-homo was receiving SSI benefits because he was poor/disabled. The Windsor case is decided in 2013, but for a year the Social Security Administration continues to pay SSI benefits to Jonny-homo based on his being 'single' and without regard to his husband's income. Then after that year the SSA says, wait a minute, you guys have been married since Windsor, cuts the benefits by 66% based on the "husband's" now considered income, and then seeks recoupment for the year the SSA sat on its rear and failed to implement Windsor's import.
My, my, my. It's interesting because LGBTs are, in a sense, fighting the SSA's recognition of their marriage (for the year from Windsor to today), which is counter-intuitive to say the least. But money talks, and their legal theory is sound. This does seem to fit the recoupment exception since it wasn't their fault--at all--and it would be unfair and frustrate the aims of the Act to seek recoupment (i.e., poor people shouldn't be asked to pay a year's worth of benefits out of the blue).
I like this case.